On 27/1/03 4:27 am, "Jeremy Derr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday, January 26, 2003, at 10:06 PM, Jim Emery wrote: > >> iPhoto makes it very easy to create a Quicktime slideshow and audio >> track from iTunes. As I understand, this is still ok as it is for >> personal use. I then decide to put this Quicktime slideshow on the web >> for friends to view. I would do this with no intent of profiting from >> the song but merely as an enhancement to a slideshow. It seems that >> since I am now putting this on a public medium, that I may be violating >> copyright laws. Especially since I think it would be possible to >> extract the audio track from a Quicktime slideshow. >> >> So in doing so, am I violating copyright laws? > > that's a question better posed to a lawyer. > > stipulating that IANAL, i don't think you're violating here ... use of > a song in a non-profit, personal use (even if posted on a website) > unique display of your creativity would seem to fall within your > fair-use rights. > IANAL either. However, I do not believe that the use of copyright music in a soundtrack does not fall within the definition of "fair use". "Fair Use" provisions are designed to allow the use of small extracts from copyright works, without infringement, for the purpose of commentary. However, the action of disseminating a piece of music as a soundtrack to an original work amongst one's close friends or relatives would almost certainly be regarded as a minor technical breach. There is clearly a world of difference between a non-profit closed group activity and a profit-led mass distribution. Providing the distribution is genuinely restricted (putting the slideshow on an open access website is asking for trouble as you would not be restricting distribution) then your chances of actually being prosecuted are quite small. It is important to appreciate that, while the issue of profit might have an overall effect on the seriousness with which a breach might be viewed, it does not necessarily stop an action being viewed as a breach of copyright law. After all, if memory serves, Napster was non-profit making originally when it was taken to court and convicted. Many people have been convicted for disseminating copyright material where there has never been any question that the motivation was to make a profit. Look at all the fan sites out there which have been served with "cease and desist" orders. Try pasting a picture of Mickey Mouse on your personal website for example....... Whether or not the copyright laws are fair or reasonable is a matter for debate but it is important that people recognise that it is relatively easy to breach them and that there are some dragon organisations out there who have every intention of enforcing them to the letter of the law. -- Steve -- The iMac List is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/> and... Small Dog Electronics http://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | - Epson Stylus Color 580 Printers - new at $69 | & CDRWs on Sale! | Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html> iMac List info: <http://lowendmac.com/imac/list.shtml> --> AOL users, remove "mailto:"; Send list messages to: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For digest mode, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subscription questions: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/imac-list%40mail.maclaunch.com/> --------------------------------------------------------------- >The Think Different Store http://www.ThinkDifferentStore.com ---------------------------------------------------------------
